President Obama claims to offer friendly advice on the EU, but he has an ulterior motive

SIR – Peter Rusby (Letters, April 23) wonders why Barack Obama and other American political figures are so desperate for Britain to stay in the EU.

Perhaps he hasn’t heard of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), which the EU and the United States are negotiating behind closed doors. It would give US corporations the right to sue an EU member state if its government policy compromised the return on their investment. Disputes would be settled by an arbitration process, with no right of appeal.

The desperation stems from the need for TTIP to be signed before President Obama leaves office – so that he can take the credit, and to protect against the eventuality that his successor might not accept the terms of the negotiation.

Roger Smith Meppershall, Bedfordshire

SIR – President Obama has said that Britain would have to go to the “back of the queue” for trade deals with America following a vote for Brexit. The suggestion that the United States would not prioritise a trading agreement with the fifth-largest economy in the world – which has a leading global financial centre and has English as its language – is laughable.

Max Ingram Cénac-et-St-Julien, Dordogne, France

SIR – Does President Obama not know that, when it comes to queuing, the British are world leaders?

James Vaux Bembridge, Isle of Wight

SIR – US goods imports from the UK in 2015 were valued at $57.8 billion (£40.1 billion), which is about a third of the value of our exports to the entire EU. US exports to the UK were of almost equal value. Why could this trade not continue after Brexit? And why, with such evenly matched imports and exports, would a US-UK free-trade agreement even be necessary?

Tony Stone Oxted, Surrey

SIR – Sixty years ago, Conservatives with hot heads and cold hearts were goading Anthony Eden, then prime minister, into taking punitive action against Egypt’s president Gamal Abdel Nasser over the Suez Canal.

They were surprised, and aggrieved, when the United States took swift and decisive action to protect its interests, and those of the international community, when Britain and France colluded with Israel to invade Egypt.

In the ensuing furore, the Soviet Union was able largely to escape the odium it deserved for its brutal concurrent invasion of Hungary.

Today we are fortunate that President Obama felt able to warn us of the likely international reaction to Brexit.

When the fiasco of 1956 was done, and the tragic Eden consigned to oblivion, a consensus developed that it had been a “collective aberration”.

Let us be ready to reach a similar charitable verdict in two months’ time.

Sir Peter Marshall London W8

SIR – I was on the fence in the EU debate until I read President Obama’s article (Comment, April 22). I found his words reasonable and persuasive and he has helped me to decide to vote In.

Why shouldn’t our oldest friend have an opinion?

Ian Elson East Harling, Norfolk

SIR – President Obama can say what he likes – if we vote out, we’ll be dealing with Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump.

Christopher Mann Bristol

SIR – It is now clear that the “special relationship” exists only so long as we do exactly what we’re told.

Cameron Morice Woodley, Berkshire

SIR – Why do worldly gentlemen like the Duke of Cambridge and President Obama frequently wear a suit and a formal shirt but no tie?

Keith Edwards Tattershall, Lincolnshire